politics – Page 3 – KenGeorge.org

Reconcilliation

A budget resolution process

appropriations committee

In my continuing effort to provide a site with simple, understandable information, here’s what I know about reconciliation. The reconciliation process is a congressional budgetary process, by which spending and taxing issues can be addressed. This process, requires a budget resolution to be part of it. The purpose of “reconciliation” is to provide instructions to committees that provide appropriations for various aspects of a budget. Their work, then, becomes part of the budget resolution.

The most commonly known fact about reconciliation is that it is a process by which any bill proceeding through congress this way, cannot be filibustered in the senate. This means any bill brought to the floors of the House or senate require only a simple majority for passage. However, not just anything can be passed through this budgetary process. Any item contained in a budgetary reconciliation bill, must affect, in some way, spending, taxing, or debt limits. This is not to say that extraneous items are totally off-limits. Technically, anything can be passed through reconciliation…..if there is no objection! In today’s political climate, this is highly unlikely. If an item is included that is extraneous, and it is objected to, it is deemed “not germane” and must be removed. This can only occur in the senate. It takes 60 votes to over ride an objection.

Reconciliation also has other rules that make it a unique process. It can be used a maximum of 3 times in a fiscal year. Once each for spending, taxing, or debt ceilings. If taxing and spending are dealt with in one bill, that is considered using it two times. I wonder why we never hear about that third qualification? Since the republican control both chambers of congress, it would seem reconciliation could be used to pass a bill that prevents a debt ceiling increase. Its comical, that when they were in the minority, they railed against a debt ceiling increase, but now, magically, it’s needed! Imagine that!

So to the point of this discussion……let me put it in the context of the failed AHCA and the coming changes to Obamacare (ACA). A vast majority of republican voters, and supported by the efforts of the Freedom Caucus in the house, wanted a “full repeal” of the ACA. The ACA is a very complex and comprehensive law. It covers thousands of topics, many having nothing to do with taxes or spending. A full repeal could never go through reconciliation. Just to be clear, the so-called 2015 repeal passed by both houses and vetoed by President Obama, was not a full repeal. Even the AHCA that was pulled from the House floor, recently, may not even gotten through the senate intact. It is to be seen that any compromise the republicans agree on, may still find difficulty getting through the senate.

If you would like to read more about reconciliation, here is an understandable site:
http://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/introduction-to-budget-reconciliation

Just a short follow up to answer my final two questions that precipitated these explanations. Those final two questions asked:

4. Do you know the difference between majority rule and super majority rule?
5. As it applies to intelligence gathering do you know what the ‘gang of 8’ is?

Most of my friends said they knew what this meant……but so we all are sure.
In the context of the current political climate: Each state elects its representatives. A state has a number of House representatives equal to approximately, 1 for every 700,000 residents. That number changes, based on the total population of the United States. The number of House members is fixed at 435. So a simple majority in the House is 216, or 50% +1. In the Senate, each state elects two senators. A simple majority in the Senate is 50 +1. Since there are exactly 100 senators, there can be a tie. Ties are broken by the Vice President, providing the 50 +1 required to form a simple majority.

A super majority is often used in the context of a filibuster, but also finds itself in several parts of the constitution. A super-majority is a number of votes required in congress to pass certain types of legislation or confirmations. There are three types of super-majorities: 3/5, 2/3, or 3/4. The House has no super-majority requirements. All legislation is passed by simple majority. The senate must have 3/5, or 60 votes, to stop a filibuster (a cloture vote), for example. 2/3, or 66 votes are required to confirm appointees or ratify a treaty. And finally, 3/4 of the state legislatures are required to vote in the affirmative to pass any amendments to the constitution.

The last question was in the context of intelligence gathering. There are 16 intelligence gathering and analyzing agencies. Each has a head, and to date, only two of those heads have been appointed by president Trump. The rest are career personnel. These agencies collect what’s referred to as “raw data” as well as “metadata” for virtually all communication in the entire world. There is very limited access to this raw data. Technically, there is only one person from each agency that can view any raw data. If that person analyzes that data to be important for national security reasons, and others must have access to it, a warrant from the FISA court must be obtained. A similar procedure exists in law enforcement, but a criminal court is used for the warranting process.

In addition to the 16 people mentioned above, eight members of congress can review raw data upon request. But even they, are not allowed to see the exposed names of American citizens in intelligence data collections. Those eight members of congress are:

Speaker, Paul Ryan
House Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi
Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell
Senate Minority Leader, Charles Schumer
House Intelligence Committee chairman, David Nunez
House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member, Adam Schiff
House Intelligence Committee chairman, Richard Burr
House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member, Mark Warner

These men are referred to as the “gang of eight”. The people in these positions change, but the positions allowed to see communication intelligence do not.

Regular Order

How is spending supposed to happen in congress

appropriations committee — A meeting of the House Appropriations Committee at a “mark-up” session

This blog is a follow-up to the previous one on the filibuster. It is in response to a question I asked on a recent FB post. “Do you understand what regular order is, in the congress?” As I stated then, much misinformation was being spread, seemingly because of a lack of understanding as to how the legislative process works. This is my attempt to educate as many as I can about that process. My last blog post discussed the senate filibuster, in the context of passing the AHCA (American Health Care Act) This post will discuss what I know about “regular order”. It certainly is not comprehensive, but made to be as concise as possible in the context of passing a Health Care reform bill.

THE BUDGETING PROCESS

Every year congress must pass a budget. This is a resolution not a law. A budget resolution sets the annual limits to spending. There are some portions of spending that, simply by law, cannot be set. This is called “mandatory” spending or like many like to call them entitlements. These are things like Medicare, Medicaid, Interest on the debt, and yes, Social Security. I’m not judging whether or not these things are entitlements, just that they represent mandatory spending that can’t be budgeted. These 4 categories represent almost half of all spending…..they cannot be cut without changing the underlying laws that created them.

The second kind of spending is called “discretionary” spending. These are the things congress can set yearly spending levels for. The biggest of these is defense and represents about 1/4 of spending. So these 5 categories now represent 3/4 of all spending, leaving only 1/4 of the budget that must carry any cuts to all spending. In the budget resolution, it is taken into account what mandatory spending must be made, then the numbers of all other spending will be debated and set, then enacted into law through a budget resolution.

Let me just say something about spending limits and just how they arrive at the amounts. At one time in the US, budgets were set by actual laws that looked at revenue as a limiting factor to spending. That changed in the 70s when “baseline budgeting” was invented. Baseline budgeting is a system of budgeting that looks only at the previous years spending to set the following years amount. Typically, whatever was spent the previous year will be increased by 1-8%. The previous year’s spending becomes the “baseline”, and it is assumed that the amount needed for the next year will be more. Rarely do they cut the previous years budgeting number, but merely the rise from the baseline. So don’t be fooled, when they say they are “cutting” the budget of a program, they are merely cutting the amount of increase, not the underlying baseline.

Once the budget resolution is set, this is when Regular order is supposed to begin. This budget resolution “authorizes” the money to be spent. Next is the necessity to “appropriate” the budgeted amount into various spending programs. For example, if the budget resolution authorizes ten billion dollars to be spent by the Department of Education, just how that money can be spent has to be done in the appropriation process. In the government there are 12 such appropriation categories.

Agriculture,
Commerce, Justice, and Science,
Defense,
Energy and Water,
Financial Services,
Homeland Security,
Interior and Environment,
Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education,
Legislative,
Military and Veterans,
State and Foreign Operations,
Transportation and Housing and Urban Development.
During regular order, each category of discretionary spending is sent to a committee that will debate and decide how the money should be spent, in accordance with the budget resolution. In this committee, priorities are discussed and just how the money will be spent is decided. Once they have completed what’s called the “mark-up”, the appropriation is sent to the floor of the House where amendments can be offered then the bill is voted on. By the way, the House is the only body that can originate spending. Of course the senate has its own process, but the actual origination of any spending must start in the House. Once each body has an appropriation bill approved, both bills wind up in a final conference committee. This is a committee chosen by the speaker of the House and minority leader and the leaders of the senate. It typically contains about 24 members chosen from all 535 congressmen, some republicans and some democrats. The conference committee then attempts to merge the two appropriations bills into one final bill. They also can make changes. When they are finished…they send that one bill to both chambers for further amendments then a final vote is taken. This then becomes the spending for the next year. This long and tedious process is supposed to be done 12 times in 1 year. It rarely happens! Even in a good year of regular order, only 3 or 4 new appropriations are completed. When an appropriation bill is not completed, before the deadline….which is October 1st, no spending can take place in that area not appropriated for. When this happens, typically a continuing resolution is agreed to. A continuing resolution (CR) is simply a document to continue the spending from the previous year, with an appropriate increase from the baseline, if that money was authorized in the budget resolution. When CRs are implemented, spending can never decrease and changes to programs cannot be made. Everything remains the same.

Presidents Obama and Bush, the men who presided over the creation of more debt than all other presidents combined

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention here something few people know. It is the reason why the national debt under Obama grew at its fastest rate in the history of our country. In fact during the 8 years of president Obama, more debt was added by the congress than all debt acquired in our history. That means that from 1787, our beginning, to 2000, the beginning of the Bush administration, the debt….. that is every dollar the US government had borrowed since 1787 had risen to 4 trillion dollars. That’s 213 years of borrowing. During the Bush term congress more that doubled this to over 9 trillion. And…….are you ready?, under the Obama term, congress doubled it again to over 19 trillion. The reason for this explosion in debt was due to the continued use of CRs and not regular order. In 2009 congress passed the largest stimulus spending in our history….$887 billion. This money had to be placed in the budget resolution for that year. Well guess what? No appropriations were made after that year.

Harry Reid

For 4 straight years Harry Reid refused to pass a new budget resolution, so congress was continually forced to pass CRs to keep the government funded. These CRs contained the stimulus spending amounts, adding a trillion dollars of debt each year.

Ok, enough bashing. What does this have to do with the AHCA. In my next post, I’ll be talking about reconciliation. But for now, know that regular order is the process of creating a budget, authorizing money to be spent, then appropriating that money to be spent in various ways. It is a complicated, tedious, and lengthy process. But it is the most important function congress has…..and it hasn’t been used for decades the way it is supposed to be. Paul Ryan promised his members and the people, that congress would return to regular order. He is trying. Understanding regular order is highly important to understanding the AHCA repeal and replace legislation. It will become more clear when I discuss reconciliation……stay tuned.

Paul Ryan

The Filibuster

Relevant information for making a decision

senate I recently wrote on FB, about the vast amount of misinformation spanning the internet, especially by well-intentioned conservatives that voice their opinions without having the needed information to formulate the proper understanding of an issue. Trust me when I say this is a natural reaction to highly charged and important stuff, but when opinions are formulated based on misinformation and a lack of understanding, it can hurt the things we hope to accomplish.

I have always been about educating my friends to the best of my ability. I make every effort to read and understand things and then report back as to what I learned, hoping to build a valuable knowledge base amongst conservatives…..and if a liberal has a desire to learn…all the much better.

As you might have guessed by now, this is mostly about the recent debate about the proposed healthcare reform bill, backed by Trump and blocked in the House by the Freedom Caucus and some moderate members of the Tuesday Group. Over the past two weeks there has been much said and debated about the AHCA (American Health Care Act). I wrote hundreds of comments and made dozens of posts explaining the reasons why we should have gotten behind it as republicans. This is when I was bombarded with the misinformation I spoke about yesterday on my FB page. So I asked 5 questions that highlighted that misinformation. So here, I wanted to provide what I know about these issues and simply help others to understand. Here’s what I posted on FB:

“If there’s anything I have discovered over the last two weeks is that there is more mis-information out there than there are facts….this cannot be disputed. When I say misinformation, I mean the repeating, posting, and commenting on subjects that the commenter has little or no knowledge of the subject. It has been said that “opinions are like assholes, everybody has one!” But uneducated opinions can be dangerous.

What I would like to do is illustrate this idea with a series… of questions. If you would just answer yes or no, without explaining, I would appreciate it. I will deal with the subject later….right now I just want to know how many of my FB friends will be honest in what they think they know I’ll start with just 5 questions….just write
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Then place a Y or N next to the number. I will compile the responses, and then ask for some details. Here are the 5 questions:

1. Do you understand how a filibuster works, where it came from, and how it can be ended on a single vote and how it can be eliminated as a senate rule? (nuclear option)
2. Do you understand what regular order is, in the congress?
3. Do you understand reconciliation beyond the 51 vote provision?
4. Do you know the difference between majority rule and super majority rule?
5. As it applies to intelligence gathering do you know what the ‘gang of 8’ is?

My purpose is not to denigrate or embarrass just to educate…as is my role. If you feel you want to Google these things before you answer, that’s fine….you will be educated. I will explain these things next, at least what I know.”

I received a sufficient response to respond. Most troubling, however, was a response implying that Google is somehow a false source of information. It can be. But that said, Google is the greatest tool for learning mankind has ever created. Used properly, which is the key, one can learn anything they desire to learn, the information of thousands of teachers is at your finger tips.

So here’s what I know:
1. The FILIBUSTER
The filibuster was a tool that sort of creeped into the senate in the 19th century. It actually started as extending a debate in order to block further action on an issue. So to that end, a senator would talk and talk and talk, frustrating his colleagues until they went home, leaving the issue unsettled. At some point, someone decided there had to be a way to stop the debate. They came up with “cloture”. Cloture is a way to stop a debate. When cloture is called for, a vote is taken. At the beginning 2/3 (66) senators needed to vote yes to stop the debate. In 1975 two big changes were made to the rule (known as rule 22). They agreed to eliminate the need to speak continuously and they lowered the threshold to stop the filibuster to 3/5 (60). This is where it stood until 2013. If One senator decides he doesn’t want an issue to be voted on, he simply declares a filibuster, and no vote can be taken, effectively stopping the issue from getting through congress. Which brings me to 2013 and one piece of misinformation. It is said that Harry Reid, the then leader of the senate, used the nuclear option to end the filibuster. Not completely accurate. The make-up of the senate in 2013 was 53-45-2. A clear democrat majority, but far from the 60 needed to stop a filibuster. Reid threatened to use the “nuclear option” (I’ll get to what that is in a minute). The issue was federal judges. At the time there were hundreds of Obama appointees, waiting for confirmation from the senate. The republicans were blocking all of them with a filibuster.

When Reid threatened to end the filibuster, the gang of 16 was created to stop Reid, yet get those federal judges confirmed. Since there were 8 democrats and 8 republicans in the gang of 16, if they agreed, they could stop a filibuster and get the judges confirmed. If the 8 republicans voted with the democrats they could stop the filibuster. If the 8 democrats voted with the republicans they could defeat any nominee from being confirmed. So an agreement was struck. The filibuster would be changed. All appointments made by a president, except to the Supreme Court, would no longer be able to be filibustered. A simple majority was to be used. So over 300 federal judges were confirmed that were appointed by Obama. But the filibuster was saved and still available for regular legislation and the selection of Supreme Court justices. The nuclear option was avoided.

So what is the nuclear option? In the constitution under Article 3, it gives the senate the power to “make its own rules”. The filibuster rule, 22, is one of those rules. But can the senate make any rule it wants? This is a debatable point, but I contend that they can’t. Any rule certainly would have to comply with the constitution itself. For example, could the senate make a rule that said only men could be on committees? Obviously this would be contrary to the 1st and 14th amendments, and would be unconstitutional. So the so-called nuclear option, or as it is also called the constitutional option, is the declaring of the filibuster, by the president of the senate, to be unconstitutional. If this is done, a vote is held on the motion, and a simple majority is needed to uphold the motion. This effectively ends the filibuster…..but permanently. You see, if a senate rule is changed, it effectively sets a precedent in constitutional jurist prudence. The rule could never be brought back. Congress would revert back to where it started, with simple majority rule. I have to say that this would be a huge step. The minority would no longer be protected by the senate. A majority could now easily roll over all opposition to its objections. The filibuster is the only tool, other than the constitution that protects the minority interests in the country. The vote, would be the only tool left to protect minority interests. But I would be remiss if I didn’t include the 17th amendment in this discussion. You see the constitution originally gave state legislatures the power to choose senators. This gave states a lot of control over their senators. States able to elect local people to their state house, could expect a US Senator that would protect their interests. If they didn’t, the state legislature could replace them. Today, senators are elected directly by the people, per the 17th amendment, leaving no recourse for change, other that the ballot box. This change can certainly be debatable, but senators are now more accountable to party rather than the people of their state. This change in the way senators are selected, made the filibuster a much more important tool and created the adversarial situation we have today. It leaves open the argument of did the founders intend a simple majority to enact legislation or a super majority of 60 votes? I’ll get into that in question 4.

So what does all this have to do with the AHCA and misinformation? If I heard it once, I heard it a thousand times…….”REPEAL OBAMACARE!” Over and over FB posts and comments asking for repeal…simply repeal it. Even House members and senators going on TV and claiming they promised a full repeal…..repeal first! they said. Well….the AHCA was not immune from a filibuster in the senate, which a full repeal would have brought, as sure as Obama vetoed the 2015 bill that called for a partial repeal. There was only one way around the filibuster if a full repeal bill was sent to the senate…..ending the filibuster for ever.

I get that there are those that think this would be a good idea, and even I am on the fence……but the filibuster has helped block nutty liberals and progressive majorities for a long time. Republicans were able to block a lot of Obama legislation during his tenure. For sure, they were doing it when it was convenient for their special interests, but that’s corruption and that’s a whole other discussion. Personally, I think ending the filibuster would be a mistake, because just imagine a democrat majority in congress and a democrat president like Obama again. Any legislation could be enacted as long as it passed constitutional muster, which, in case you haven’t noticed, the courts have been packed with leftist, activist judges. This is why the republicans are prepared to end the filibuster to get Gorsuch confirmed to the Supreme Court. In the scenario I just portrayed, the Supreme Court would be the only tool left to stop leftists policies from being enacted. His confirmation would maintain the court’s conservative slant, at least for a while. The next three justices to leave the bench are all liberal leaning activist types. Again these vacancies will be occurring easily within the next few years. As long as republicans have control of the senate, and the filibuster is gone, the court will shift right for a generation. Even if the democrats regained control within the next few years, there would be no change. So today…it makes sense to eliminate it. But in the future it could be a terrible choice. At minimum, if the filibuster is ended, we can rest assured that the court will not change in the foreseeable future.

To sum up……The AHCA would have been filibustered in the senate, if it was a full repeal of the Affordable Care Act. So the AHCA was created to get the bill through the senate and avoid a filibuster.

What’s Going On?

Should America fight the Deep State?

Last night I watched, again, the movie, “The Bourne Ultimatum”. You probably have seen one of these action packed spy movies. What struck me, as I watched, was the sophistication of the CIA capabilities to surveille someone. Now, I am cognisant of the fact, that it was only a movie, but certainly the makers of movies do their homework and research to create realism. If anywhere close to true, it depicted the ability to INSTANTLY capture a cell phone conversation. It showed how they could follow any person visually as they traveled through a city, and how they could capture any and all transactions any person conducted electronically…..It is absolutely stunning just what their capabilities are.

The recent revelations from the CIA methodology leaks proves, these types of capabilities not only exist, they are but the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Good or bad, it is what it is. I truly believe, whether its good or bad, really depends on people. Good people will do what is needed to catch the bad guys and keep America safe. Bad guys will use these abilities to gain and maintain power. They will use these tools for political purposes…..and that’s what I believe is happening.

AG Loretta Lynch, just before leaving office, issued an order to allow the CIA and the NSA to share this raw data with 16 other agencies. Many are now asking why? Could it be to keep us safer by having the ability to collaborate? Could it be a way to insulate those that are leaking this information to the press? The former would be the idealistic and patriotic thing….but we know that the Obama administration and the Clinton machine has never displayed any such feelings. If it is the latter, then we have a very real problem. As I’ve written in many other blog posts, the CIA is running some sort of Deep State. It is my belief, that they think they know what needs to be done and are operating with the best interests of America in mind. They do not want change, and Trump will bring change.

In the plot of the movie, the CIA was running a clandestine program called Blackbriar. It trained and equipped assassins to kill people they deemed to be threats….even Americans. But as in all good plots, the heads of the program, went astray and broke a multitude of laws. They had no hatred of America, but they sincerely believed they should do anything necessary to safeguard America, but also to protect and hide what they were doing. I don’t think it is a long stretch to believe this is what’s going on. That said, there’s another side to this….MONEY! These programs require money…and lots of it. And that money is coming from a multitude of sources. If you’ve read all my work below titled “INTO THE WEEDS” in sequence, you can connect the dots. The Clinton Machine is neck-deep in this Deep State. Them and others play along, but have other motives…..they want to get rich.

This week, a story came out about where the leaks were coming from. The story was by Catherine Herridge of FOX. She is their intelligence reporter. She said they are looking at “contractors”. These are the hired mercenaries that do the grunt work in intelligence. She went on to report how the use of contractors has exploded in recent years. Snowden was a contractor. In my studies, several times I connected John Ashcroft of Constellis (formerly Blackwater) with the Clinton Machine and TENEO. Now, I am very close to these dots, and for me it is not much of a leap to suggest that Clinton, Ashcroft, Clapper, Comey, and so many others, are deeply connected to this Deep State.

John Ashcroft CEO, Constellis

James Comey

James Clapper

Running the government, and taking care of the people, the economy, and all other domestic issues seem to be a side task to this deep state. All the drama we talk about every day is a distraction to this deep state. But don’t be confused. This deep state is not trying to take over America…it is there to do whatever it takes to maintain the status quo in the world, and especially to maintain the status quo of who has power and who makes the decisions. However, it is not a homogenous group. The grunts doing the work and carrying out the orders are loyal Americans who truly believe they are doing right. Many of those giving the orders, think politically and selfishly, and use this apparatus for their own gain. The law makes absolutely, no difference, and has become irrelevant to this deep state. Like any organization with too much power, they have forgotten why we have laws and rules and a constitution.

So should we fight against this deep state and try to uncover and end it? Could it hurt America in the long run? Or should we just accept it? As I started with, it all comes down to people……whether they are good or bad. That said, there is a principle and an old saying that may answer the question: “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” This is why we have the rule of law.

INDIVISIBLE 2

Their Strategy

In my last post I began an investigation into Indivisible. Before I go on with that report below, I want to post the Facebook post I made that prompted this research. It stemmed from an audio recording provided that exposed organizing tactics of the disruption of town halls in small city congressional districts. Here is that post:

“Recently I posted an audio of some folks strategizing about how to disrupt republican town halls. The main instructor was identified as James Proctor. So I did a little research….duh!

I can’t attest to any of this because it was an audio, and I couldn’t see his face, thus age. But there were only 3 James Proctors listed in Louisiana. The one that stood out was from Jeanerette, Louisiana, almost on top of Acadiana, where the article said there was a branch of “Indivisible”. Coincidently, Jeanerette and Acadiana are only about 30 miles south of Lafayette, where LSU is. Hmmmmm! I think I got the right James Proctor. If I do, Mr. Proctor is a reverend and runs an outfit called ALPHA COMMUNITY OUTREACH CENTER. Below is a screen shot from a D & B report that shows they got a little money in the bank. But there’s more. On their non-profit documents there are 3 principles, including Proctor. One is named Clifton Tate, who is also a partner in an insurance agency in Opelousas, LA about 10 miles north of Lafayette, but lives in Jeanerette. Mr. Tate is the director of JEANERETTE CITIZENS ALLIANCE FOR PROGRESS, INC. At the exact same address is another non-profit called EVENING STARLIGHT OPTIMIST CLUB. I initially thought this was just some other business in the same building, but it is registered as a non-profit, and the same guy is also an agent for both…Russell Boutte of Jeanerette.

alpha

The actions on the audio are reported to have been guided by “INDIVISIBLE” an organized progressive, very organized group that claims affiliation with 7000 groups all over America. That’s no small feat. I’ll do more on Indivisible tomorrow, but I believe this is a PAID, organized effort to undermine any and all of Trumps legislation. Never, ever, never, underestimate the power or the money on the left. They will do anything and everything to stop our movement.”

Here is the audio and story behind INDIVISIBLE:
http://dailycaller.com/2017/02/27/leaked-audio-reveals-anti-trump-forces-manufacturing-hostile-town-hall/
Matthew Schoenberger, of New Orleans, shouts a question at Republican U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy during a town hall meeting in Metairie

If you’ve read the first post on this story, I tracked the money and followed it to its source. I also outlined how INDIVISIBLE was created and by whom. Now I want to show you their strategy and why they are doing what they are doing. Make no mistake, the left is trying to create a Tea Party type movement. But they are doing it using violence, agitation and disruption. They no longer believe that protests alone can get them what they want. They are taking their disruption to small towns and cities near you. The left is on the march and have the money and the organization to spread their radical ideas to our communities. Pay close attention to who is running for your mayor, your council, or your school board. The only wildcard is the division between the two faction competing for control…..the OFA (Organizing for Action) which is run by Obama and the DNC establishment and INDIVISIBLE, which is the more radical, socialist wing of the party, run by the now defunct Sanders people.

In my research, I came across a man named Micah White. He is a co-founder of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Occupy Wall Street happened 5 years ago. In a recent interview, Mr. White said OWS was a “constructive failure”. He said this to the interviewer:
“….the number one thing for people to realize is that protest alone doesn’t give the people power. There is no constitutional requirement that Trump has to listen to protests if they exceed a certain size, et cetera. There’s only two ways to gain political power in our world right now and that’s to win elections or win wars.” Then on November 14^th, White wrote in an article for Guardian. He said this: “What is to be done now? American activists must move from detached indignation to revolutionary engagement. They must use the techniques that create social movements to dominate elections.”

Now, you might say…just another wacho from the left. But they really do have a plan and the money to carry it out. Mr. White tried somewhat of an experiment. He moved from the big city of San Francisco, to a corner of Oregon’s coast called Nahalem. Even as small as it was it had its poor and homeless. With an average income of $47,000 it lived off of tourism. Nahalem has 180 registered voters. He lived there for a few years and then ran for mayor. It completely divided the small town. Neighbor versus neighbor, black versus white. His goal was to see if he could take his message to rural America. He lost the contentious election 139-36. The point to this, is it was an experiment. This is the coming application of taking over rural America…..win small elections and turn the counties.

In that same interview with Current, another guest was being interviewed along with White. Her name was Becky Bond. She was a senior advisor to Bernie Sanders, and responsible for organizing the grass roots through the use of social media for the campaign. She said this: “….consumers going to a company or it can be as voters going to a politician threatening to throw them out if they don’t fight for the agenda that helps the people with the problems that they’re facing in their lives. It’s also increasingly becoming people becoming sand in the gears of the machine and actually resisting and refusing to participate in a government that abuses their rights.” I’ll leave it up to you to read into her comments what you will.

rules-for-revolutionaries

Bond also has written a book. A book with a familiar ring to it with political junkies: Rules for Revolutionaries But she has taken her knowledge from the campaign and has taken it to a new level creating INDIVISIBLE, an organized, well funded community organizing force touting 7000 affiliates all over America, ready to protest at a minutes notice. But there is a disconnect between the tens of thousands of minions within the INDIVISIBLE movement and the establishment OFA, led by OBAMA. Obama has said that the left needs to create a “tea party type movement”. So both factions have the same strategy, and both are vying for the same money and control. Just as with the republican party, there is a massive struggle between the grass roots and the establishments. Who will win in the democrat party is unclear, but the point of this report is to warn you of the new strategy. They are bringing these protests to small rural venues. They have figured out that they need to win more than just the big cities. But beware, its not just simple protests. They plan to agitate and disrupt, and find militant candidates that will run for local offices. In other words, they want to divide our neighborhoods. The irony is, just as they are pulling out stops to win in the rural areas, republicans are trying to figure out how to win in the cities. Whoever solves the problem will be undefeatable….I’m putting my money on Trump.

INDIVISIBLE

The Investigation Begins

I want to get some of this out while its fresh in my mind…..my memory just isn’t what it used to be. I like to compare it to a mall parking lot at Christmas. A fact drives around for a half hour trying to find an empty space at the front. Someone has to leave (a memory) before you can use the spot to use later.

Anyway….I have been trying to determine what’s going on with all the protests. It really wasn’t too hard to get a reasonable framework. It starts with a cellular phone company called CREDO MOBILE. This is a real corporation with about $25 million in sales, but is a part of a larger venture called WORKING ASSETS, Inc., which is a 100 million dollar company. The two founders of Working Assets are Laura Scher and Michael Kieschnick. Credo is a very unique company in what they do with their money. Billed as a “socially conscious” enterprise, it donates millions to progressive causes. On their website, they say that to date they have contributed $82 million to progressive causes.

After reading that paragraph, you might think…well that’s fine….that is their right. But let’s go just a little deeper. Laura Scher is a director of the Rosenberg Foundation. (Here we go again with a foundation.) The Rosenberg Foundation funds our old friends at the TIDES CENTER….if you don’t remember these folks they were the money behind A.C.O.R.N. and a favorite place where George Soros parks his money. Oddly enough, the Rosenberg Foundation also funds the RAND CORPORATION, a non-profit, that is also funded by the US government. They do a vast amount of research on many, many subjects. This may be a superfilous tangent, but RAND does a lot of analysis for the military. The other co-founder of CREDO, Michael Kieschnick, is a director at the LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS. You may not recognize this outfit, but I sure do. During past research, I bumped into this group several times. Before I go on, I just want to point something out about being a director of any public or private group. Although it does prove a connection between people, it doesn’t prove much beyond that. In fact some of the most important people in the world are board members or directors of dozens of companies and organizations at the same time. What’s important about these two directorships is, for both Scher and Kieschnick, this is their only directorship. The function of a director is to determine where they will spend money, especially within a foundation board. So they have to not only know but actually vote to spend this money. Back to the story. The LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS, and the TIDES CENTER are both left wing activists groups. This is where it gets very interesting. The LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS and the TIDES CENTER are also both funded by SEA CHANGE. That’s that obscure organization funded by Nat Simons and Klein, Ltd. Klein, Ltd being that organization that had deep connections to the Russian Oil Industry. You can read about Sea Change here.

INTO THE WEEDS 11

The League of CONSERVATION VOTERS is a national partner of AMERICA VOTES. You know where that takes us? PLANNED PARENTHOOD and Cecile Richards. Normally I’d say that was shocking to me, but I have done a lot of these studies, and it seems we always get back to here or the Clinton Foundation.

I started this with CREDO as the starting point and I took you all the way to the source of the money. But what does any of this have to do with the protests in airports and congressional town halls? Credo’s two largest recipients of funding are the ACLU and Planned Parenthood. In one weekend, the ACLU gave $13 million to Becky Bond and Kenneth Pennington, the people that founded INDIVISIBLE. This is the organization that is organizing and paying people to teach how to agitate. They have paid for and aided in the creation of a handbook called “A PRACTICAL GUIDE FOR RESISTING THE TRUMP AGENDA” It is a 26 page guide explaining tactics to disrupt and agitate in order to MAKE congress listen. You can read this pamphlet here.

indivisible

It was authored using a collaborative effort between these folks Angel Padilla, Leah Greenberg, Billy Fleming, Caroline Kavit, Emily Phelps, Ezra Levin, Gonzalo Martinez de Vedia, Indivar Dutta-Gupta, Jennay Ghowrwal, Jeremy Halle, Mary Humphreys, Matt Traldi, Sara Clough, and Sara Dohl

I also found that Bond and Pennington are also two former senior advisors to the Sanders campaign. I also found that the OFA (Organizing For Action) A group of Obama supporters is also raising a lot of money…..and these two factions are not on the same page. In fact, one article, it was said that they are on a collision course. So what do I think is going on here? I believe that the people at the bottom are truly grass roots. They have no idea how they are being manipulated by the rich elite. They are used just like serfs to serve the interests of those that they so hate. But the money flows in and things get done…..I don’t think they give it much thought. At the other end, the usual layer after layer after layer, covering their fingerprints on what they are doing. Soros, Cecile Richards, the ACLU, all the normal players spending gobs and gobs of money, to agitate and protest to gain power for their perverse agenda. In my next post I will talk about what their new strategy just might be. And how this INDIVISIBLE is using young people and social justice warriors to change the political landscape. Stay tuned, I’ve only scratched the surface.

A LOOK INSIDE GOVERNMENT

How your money is wasted.

wytch-farm-fracking-fac — Wytch Farm fracking facility

Don’t ask me why, but in my ongoing research, I thought it would be interesting to go inside government and see what it looks like in there. It’s not easy, but I did find an interesting avenue to stroll down. I firmly believe the more we know about how it all works, the easier it is to make determinations about what’s true and what’s fake. I tried hard to keep it short and simple, but government is complicated…..politics is woven into everything. So here’s one glimpse into one of its inner workings.

In 1964, an obscure agency was created to make recommendations to congress and administrative agencies as to how to create and implement regulations. I suppose like with all things congress does, it had good intentions. It is called the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS). It was made up of paid staff and volunteers from business, science, and academia to look at the regulatory process and make recommendation as to how to streamline the process and in short, make it better. By 1995, this agency was defunded and discontinued. If you recall, 1994 was the year the republicans gained control of the House for the first time in 40 years. While it was in business, the agency developed a procedure called REG-NEG, which stands for Negotiated Regulations. It was designed by staff members David Pritzker and Deborah Dalton. Its purpose was to bring all stake holders together before a regulation was created, in order to shorten the time for implementation and to avoid litigation after the fact.

Little did we know that this agency was reinstated by president Obama in 2009. It was funded by congress in the usual way, in secret, without fanfare….placed obscurely in an appropriation bill. It has a paid chairman, and a 12 member staff….all appointed by the president. However it also has a member list of 38, of not paid members, 10 of which are appointed by the president. One of these appointed members was Thomas Perez, the new head of the DNC and former secretary of Labor under Obama. As near as I can tell, all 10 were Obama loyalists which is not surprising.

I only mention this, because in 1997, during the Clinton Administration, Cary Coglianese, a law professor at Penn University, did a study and wrote an article, criticizing the REG-NEG procedures. His work was quickly denounced by one Phillip Harter of the Washington-based Mediation Consortium, that his methodology was faulty and he only looked at the most controversial issues. It was not shared that professor Coglianese was a rabid environmentalist and a climate change advocate. When the agency was re-created, in 2009, it soon abandoned the REG-NEG protocol. Professor Coglianese was added to the agency roster and is a current member. Since 2009, the EPA has reverted to its own way of imposing regulations. The idea of getting input from those affected, was done away with. They have stacked this obscure agency with lawyers and professors. Of the 38 members listed on their website, 31 are either a lawyer or a professor.

I don’t know what this all means, but we know that over the last 8 years, the EPA has run wild making intrusive regulations, with seemingly no concerns for business, the economy, or even private citizens. The regulations fulfill an agenda, to stymie any reasonable exploration of oil, mining of coal, construction of refineries, use of public or private land or building of pipelines. But one thing to see in addition to the EPA’s malfeasance is another agency that serves no purpose, costing millions to fund, being staffed with appointees of the president. Fortunately, Donald Trump is and is trying to change this type of regulation, and this type of waste. We can do both….keep the environment sound, and promote and encourage economic activity. But like Bannon said earlier, the administrative state needs to be dismantled including this purely political agency, ACUS. In fact…it’s absolutely imperative that we do.

The Battle Continues

We must win the fight against the progressives!

An essay from my great friend Robert Surgenor. Robert is a retired detective, long time police officer, author, photographer, and IT expert who is a true American conservative and patriot. He sees the problems of America through the eyes of common sense. I am proud to include his latest essay on my blog.
tea_party09
Buckle up folks. Many of you are aware of what I am about to say, but many are clueless as to what is happening in our political world right now.

If we lose the fight I am about to describe, the United States of America will cease to exist as a free nation designed by our forefathers as a representative republic that provides opportunities and freedoms that no other country has ever experienced in the history of the word.

The progressive socialistic movement in this country has been taking baby steps for years to take control of our government. Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama all took steps to rip the control of our government from “We The People” and to transfer that authority to themselves. They had grand plans to complete their mission with the election of Hillary Clinton. They miscalculated the will of We The People, and the tenacity of Donald Trump.

But it didn’t take long for the progressive movement to regroup. Barack Obama has set up headquarters in Washington. There is overwhelming evidence that there is a network of noted liberal leaders working together in what could be described as a “shadow government.” And the major objective of this organization is to disrupt and destroy the efforts of Donald Trump.

The progressive liberals hate conservatism. And they are dedicated to destroying it. They believe an unborn baby can be murdered. The conservative movement is a threat to that activity. They believe that men should be allowed to marry men. The conservative movement believes otherwise. They believe that the hard earned dollars of the working man should be given to people who don’t work. Conservatives believe that a person should be allowed to keep what they earn, and if you can work and don’t, you don’t live. Both classic and social liberalism are a threat to conservatism.

The liberals are busy disrupting the town meetings being held by the Republicans. They want to make it appear that conservatives are unhappy with Trump. Closet liberals, like John Boehner are making public statements to discredit Trump and his desire to dismantle Obamacare. Nancy Pelosi and Chuck You Schumer spend hours in front of the news cameras lying to the American people about Donald Trumps’s objectives. Elizabeth Warren has been seen screeching about how she is single handedly going to stop Donald Trump from building his wall. Inside the Trump administration, Obama appointees, still working in many of the numerous departments within the government, are leaking secret information to the media and throwing roadblocks in the way of progress that Trumps hopes to accomplish.

The swamp is much deeper and more dangerous that anyone imagined. There are citizen activists that want to destroy Trump. There are Democratic elected officials that want to destroy Trump. There are Republican elected officials that want to destroy Trump.

We The People had better become engaged in this conflict. If we lose, America will no longer exist. Seriously!

Into the Weeds 11 – Update

Pay for play reaches new lows.

skolkovo

In my last post I mentioned a Russian start up program called SKOLKOVO innovation center. Well apparently this is a big deal, to date hosting over 900 companies, mostly start-up and mostly hi-tech new technology firms. I found some of the American Companies that are aiding in advancing this technology. They include Microsoft, Google, Intel, Cisco, GE, IBM, Honeywell, Johnson & Johnson, Boeing, Dow, HCL America, Price Waterhouse, and others. From Europe, tech giants, Siemens and Nokia From India, Tata. And from Russia, Rusnano and Lukoil. So far, American companies alone have invested 2 billion dollars in this tech venture in Russia. Oddly enough, the same Russian investment fund that was used to start SKOLKOVO was used to purchase Uranium One…..you may remember this is the deal brokered by Hillary Clinton and Frank Giustra to sell 20% of American uranium reserves to the Russians. Not only did Frank Giustra donate over 30 million dollars to the Clinton Foundation, I recently found out the same Russian company that now controls those American mines of Uranium, also penned a deal with Iran to sell them Uranium.

Now you have to admit this is special! Selling our technology, our uranium reserves, and giving them to Russia and Iran….two of our biggest enemies. I can see right inside the liberal skull….. “if we help them they won’t attack us…..we just need to treat them better”. Well, how’d that work out with N. Korea when Bill Clinton gave them nuclear technology? Or how about giving China missile technology and all our factories? Is that working for America?

Its working for somebody. Every single one of those companies listed above, just coincidently donated big money to the Clinton Foundation or paid Bill Clinton big money for a speech. Since the Foundation only lists donations in 5 million dollar increments its hard to say the exact number….but its at least 10 million and as high as 25 million. I might also add that the CF has over 300,000 donors, and many have not even been disclosed. Many, many are individuals. I could spend days just studying donors, its irrelevant. Some of those individuals are certainly corporate officers or foundation managers that bring a lot less attention, when they donate as an individual.

Have we learned nothing from history? Are we so stupid that we keep funding our foreign competitors and provide them the technology to defeat us economically? Are we really that stupid, or is it just greed? Someday we will regret all this “cooperation”. But I guess there are plenty of folks that just don’t give a shit about America…making money is all that matters.

Into the Weeds 11

Why should we still pursue Hillary Clinton?

podesta-and-putin-640x480 — John Podesta Vladimir Putin

I almost can’t wait to tell this tale. It is way, way convoluted….so you’ll have to pay close attention. I continue my research on the Clinton Foundation. Why, you say? The election is over and Hillary is no more. Not necessarily……the money! Its always the money!

I came across a story on Breitbart that peeked my interest. Somehow I missed it when it first came out in October of 2016. The story revealed that John Podesta transferred 75,000 shares of common stock to a shell company in California, registered in Delaware, named Leonidio. Trouble is, it is a complete ghost of a holding company. Nobody can find who owns it. But let’s set that aside for now. What’s more important is the stock. The stock was in a company called Joule, unlimited. Joule is a tech company based in Bedford, MA. Its tech is bio-fuel and green energy. Podesta, in addition to receiving the 75,000 shares of stock, also sat on the board of one of the three branches of Joule. He did not disclose any of this, required by law, on his financial disclosures when he joined the Obama administration or the Clinton campaign. Most of this information, so far, is in the Breitbart articles. But it gets much, much better.

Also on the board of Joule is a man named Reuben Vardanyan. He is a long time friend and advisor to Putin. You might call him a Russian Oligarch. He is native Armenian but has many financial interests in Russia, including banks, tech companies and oil interests. He is very, very wealthy. He founded an entity called SKOLKOVO, a Russian management school, dedicated to the tech industries. During the time that both Podesta and Vardanyan were on the board together of Joule, they received a 35 million dollar investment from a Russian government fund. At the same time another shell company was being set up in Bermuda…..Klein Ltd. The whole scheme seems to have been hatched sometime in early 2011, shortly before Podesta was placed on the board of Joule. Klein, Ltd. has absolutely no information known, since it was set up in Bermuda and its against Bermuda law to provide any information, but the agents of Klein are known. They have strong connections to the Russian oil industry and Vardanyan and share the law firm that set up the shell company, Klein, and a foundation called Sea Change. Sea Change is involved in this scheme as well. They appear to be funded by only two sources: Klein Ltd. and Nat Simons and his wife, Marilyn. Mr. Simons is a big left wing donor to Hillary Clinton and a rabid environmentalist. Sea Change is no small outfit. They take in about 30 million a year from just two sources. It is exclusively spent on climate change issues and alternate energy, with the one exception of millions a year given to the Center for American Progress….you remember them….that’s John Podesta’s organization. Somehow though, I think Nat Simons is a useful idiot. Maybe not, but the whole goal here seems to be to block, delay, and stop our development and use of fossil fuels. Now why would Russia invest in that? This seems to sharpen the image a little more, as to why climate change is so important to so many elites. By the way, all the people mentioned here are making millions and millions off all this advocacy.

But wait….there’s more. Above, while introducing the Russian connection, Vardanyan, I mentioned a school he created called SKOLKOVO. During Hillary’s “reset” with Russia, as secretary of state, at the request of SKOLKOVO, brought together 17 high tech American Companies to furnish technology to SKOLKOVO. All 17 companies were Clinton Foundation Donors or paid Bill big money for a speech. Hillary was warned by the FBI, that much of the technology could have duel use in military applications. Nothing was stopped. The technology was purchased, just as 20% of our uranium reserves were purchased.

For details and further reading I will furnish links at the bottom. But let’s sum up: Podesta, illegally, does not disclose his directorship of a Russian funded alternate fuel company……gets huge fee. Shares board with Reuben Vardanyan, close friend and confident of Vladimir Putin. Russians fund Klein, Ltd which funds Sea Change to weaken American resolve for using fossil fuel, donates to Center for American Progress…..John Podesta. Hillary arranges technology transfers to the Russians by 17 U.S. companies, all contributing to the Clintons.

Now! Tell me….who actually has ties to the Russians?

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/01/timeline-countdown-john-podestas-35-million-russian-deal/

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/10/13/wikileaks-bombshell-john-podesta-owned-75000-shares-putin-connected-energy-company/

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2014/07/30/exposed-sea-change-the-shadowy-one-percenter-foundation-waging-war-on-affordable-energy/

http://www.insidephilanthropy.com/fundraising-for-climate-change/sea-change-foundation-grants-for-climate-change.html

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/funderProfile.asp?fndid=5424

https://panamapapers.icij.org/20160403-putin-russia-offshore-network.html